Pagan Rings

[DHK]

Of course he is correct,

That is why this line of logic should be applied to other issues as well.

The meaning of the object is in the person using the object.

The meaning behind my wedding ring is my devotion to my wife...

Roger is the one differing with you. I agree with you. The ring is a symbol of the unity that I have with my wife.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

So the truth is we all get to pick the 'paganism' we choose to accept and the 'paganism' we get to condemn others for.

In reality I am no more against wedding rings than other 'pagan' symbols which have culturally become neutral as used by believers.

 

[Spinach]

Ironic. That's the only word I can think of. Ironic.

My husband and I enjoy our wedding rings, though I have to lose a few more lbs to fit back in mine. My ring doesn't make or seal my marriage. It is what I wear to remember the day, to think of him, and to tap to show some loser that I am indeed taken.

What bothers me about wedding rings is that it is tradition to spend one month's salary on one. Oh my! Weddings, wedding rings, the dress, the cake..... it's all so expensive----and so many put that above the marriage itself.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

The ring is a symbol of the unity that I have with my wife.

Just like a Christmas tree, for so many, is a symbol of family traditions and closeness that is associated with this time of year.

Neither the tree, nor the ring, are meant to replace the true meaning of Christmas or marriage. They are man-made traditions, both with pagan origins, which we have neutralised and culturised with our usage.

 

[LeBuick]

Just like a Christmas tree, for so many, is a symbol of family traditions and closeness that is associated with this time of year.

Neither the tree, nor the ring, are meant to replace the true meaning of Christmas or marriage. They are man-made traditions, both with pagan origins, which we have neutralised and culturised with our usage.

Good point, I know some view Christmas as a pagan holiday but I celebrate the birth of my Lord and Saviour. It doesn't matter to me that it may not be His birthday, I know He was born and am content setting aside a season for peace on earth and goodwill toward man.

Now what's really Ironic, is how God got every religion to set this season aside for this purpose. Be it Christmas, Kwanzaa, or Haunekah, etc... This is the season for peace on earth and goodwill toward man...

 

[mcdirector]

He who is without sin . . .



I should have put a winkie in my earlier post.

The thing is we have absolutely NO IDEA how many and what traditions we have today that have roots in pagan history. Probably many more than we like to consider.

Until someone starts pointing them out that is.

Life is short.

I'm not pulling off my wedding rings. (I did mention that :tongue3:.) I'm not dumping my Christmas decorations. (Although they did stay in the closet this year but that's because we are traveling.)

 

[Matt Black]

Roger is the one differing with you. I agree with you. The ring is a symbol of the unity that I have with my wife.

So kindly apply the same logic and principle to the 'pagan tree' thread.

 

[tinytim]

Roger is the one differing with you. I agree with you. The ring is a symbol of the unity that I have with my wife.

NO Roger is merely pointing out your Illogic on the pagan tree thread.

Like is posted before, kindly apply your logic in this thread to the one about pagan trees...

Both are neutral, It is only when someone adds meaning to them they become symbols for something.

 

[DHK]

Just like a Christmas tree, for so many, is a symbol of family traditions and closeness that is associated with this time of year.

Neither the tree, nor the ring, are meant to replace the true meaning of Christmas or marriage. They are man-made traditions, both with pagan origins, which we have neutralised and culturised with our usage.

Don't you think there is a big difference between a symbolic thing, despite its origin, associated with a public ceremony commanded for all mankind, compared to a symbolic thing, despite its origin, associated with a specific celebration of Christ, voluntarily celebrated by Christians but also celebrated by naive unbelievers who know nothing about the true gospel message?
I find a big difference.
One is secular having to do with a secular ceremony. The ceremony may or may not be "Christianized." So what.

The other supposedly is Christian; but in reality it is not. It is pagan celebrated by the unsaved world-wide. In reality, per-centage wise, very few born-again Christians celebrate it compared to the unsaved. And those that do celebrate it are just like the unsaved imitating the ways of the world, and that is a shame. We are called to be different from the world; not to be conformed to the world. That is the difference.

 

[4His_glory]

The other supposedly is Christian; but in reality it is not. It is pagan celebrated by the unsaved world-wide. In reality, per-centage wise, very few born-again Christians celebrate it compared to the unsaved. And those that do celebrate it are just like the unsaved imitating the ways of the world, and that is a shame. We are called to be different from the world; not to be conformed to the world. That is the difference.

The wedding ring is supposedly christian but it is not. It is pagan and used by unsaved people world-wide. In reality, percentage wise, very few born-again christians celebrate it compared to the unsaved. And those that do celebrate it are just like the unsaved imitating the ways of the world, and it is a shame. We are called to be different from the world, no to be conformed to the world. That is the difference.

Use the same logic brother either way, and it shows the futility of the argument.

 

[DHK]

The wedding ring is supposedly christian but it is not. It is pagan and used by unsaved people world-wide. In reality, percentage wise, very few born-again christians celebrate it compared to the unsaved. And those that do celebrate it are just like the unsaved imitating the ways of the world, and it is a shame. We are called to be different from the world, no to be conformed to the world. That is the difference.

Use the same logic brother either way, and it shows the futility of the argument.

No it isn't.
Marriage is commanded by God to all people whether they are saved or not--to every individual in this world. It is not a Christian ceremony. That makes the ring meaningless. It has no Christian symbolic value and doesn't need one.

But how dare one associate the Christmas tree with the birth of Christ, as so defile the birth of our Lord and Saviour with the godless defilement of the filth of this world.
If you are going to celebrate the birth of Christ, come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord and touch not the unclean thing, and then the Lord says, I will receive you.
For whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

 

[4His_glory]

No it isn't.
Marriage is commanded by God to all people whether they are saved or not--to every individual in this world. It is not a Christian ceremony. That makes the ring meaningless. It has no Christian symbolic value and doesn't need one.

But how dare one associate the Christmas tree with the birth of Christ, as so defile the birth of our Lord and Saviour with the godless defilement of the filth of this world.
If you are going to celebrate the birth of Christ, come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord and touch not the unclean thing, and then the Lord says, I will receive you.
For whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Thanks for making the point. Marriage is ordained by God! how dare one defile God´s holy institution with a pagan ring. If you are going to have a marriage that honors God, come out from among the world and be ye separate saith the Lord and touch not he unclean thing (the ring).

So are you saying then that all who use Christmas trees are friends of the world and enemies of God?

 

[tinytim]

No, DHK wouldn't do that.. because that would be making fun of those of us that have the conviction that a Christmas tree is an appropriate symbol of the birth of Christ...

The Christmas tree represents the eternal life that is only found in Christ.. because it is an evergreen.
The lights represent the fact that Christ is the light of the world.
The bulbs that reflect the light stand for us because we are to reflect the light of Christ.
The star represents the star of bethlehem that announced that Christ was born.

Those are my convictions, and DHK would never make fun or put down my convictions because that would be unChristian like...

And DHK is a Christian.

 

[Marcia]

The vast majority of sources cite the wedding ring as being of pagan origin. (google it and see for yourself). The Bible talks much of worldly adornments and their danger.

Should Christians have any thing to do with them? Are we compromising with the world by using them in our wedding services? Are we trying to mix paganism with Christ when we speak of marriage symbolising Christ and the Church and the wedding ring symbolising eternity. One symbol is Bibilcal, the other pagan. Can we mix them in the same service?

Do Christians love their pagan rings too much to give them up? Have their worldly pagan rings taken the place of God?

Is there ANY Bible basis for instituting such a pagan practice?

The ring is merely a symbol and cannot be right or wrong in and of itself. It depends on what it is being used for, so it's fine to use it for marriage.

The days of the week are all rooted in the names of pagan gods; lots of things have pagan origins.

I think crossing the line involves either practicing a pagan ritual that honors a pagan view or god; or wearing a symbol that is currently seen as occult or Pagan or New Age (like wearing a pentagram or yin-yang symbol). The latter is not necessarily wrong if you wear it for an aesthetic value, but is very unwise and misleading for a Christian to do so.

The question (and no offense, Roger) is very typical of the kind of concerns we see in the church today: a focus on the more meaningless spiritual things while ignoring the truly dangerous ones. This is one of my pet peeves and I am seeing it all the time.

Christians worry about using a Christmas tree but listen to Word Faith teachers or read New Age books or bad Christian books and think they are great. Then they get mad when you point out the theological flaws or errors and call you a "Pharisee" or "divisive."

 

[LeBuick]

Don't you think there is a big difference between a symbolic thing, despite its origin, associated with a public ceremony commanded for all mankind, compared to a symbolic thing, despite its origin, associated with a specific celebration of Christ, voluntarily celebrated by Christians but also celebrated by naive unbelievers who know nothing about the true gospel message?
I find a big difference.
One is secular having to do with a secular ceremony. The ceremony may or may not be "Christianized." So what..

I disagree.... Let's use a public prayer for example, the person praying will be praying to their God. In my heart, I am taking their words and sending them to my God. When done if I agree, I say AMEN for my God to hear and answer their prayer.

Now there will be some non-believers who will say AMEN. As long as they are praying within their hearts, God will hear their prayer. Like wise to the Muslim or Buddhist God, they are saying AMEN to their god. So now we have one public prayer being simultaneously prayed to many gods.

What you choose in your heart determines what a celebration means to you. At a wedding, I celebrate the spiritual union but I imagine there are others there for different reasons. You never know what's in a man's heart. This is why we can't judge actions. Don't let events or objects fool you because of their "common" use or interpretation, you have to know what's in each heart to know the true meaning.

 

[DHK]

I disagree.... Let's use a public prayer for example, the person praying will be praying to their God. In my heart, I am taking their words and sending them to my God. When done if I agree, I say AMEN for my God to hear and answer their prayer.

Now there will be some non-believers who will say AMEN. As long as they are praying within their hearts, God will hear their prayer. Like wise to the Muslim or Buddhist God, they are saying AMEN to their god. So now we have one public prayer being simultaneously prayed to many gods.

A Muslim (or any unbeliever) cannot pray to the same God you are praying to. It is impossible. He doesn't know Him. He cannot say "Our Father." He has no Father but the devil. He has not been born into the family of God, and therefore God is not his Father. Therefore the necessity of the New Birth. All unsaved pray to another god, whether we like it or not. That is why I was not adverse when they took public prayer out of the public schools. Most of them were praying to a god, that they knew not.

What you choose in your heart determines what a celebration means to you. At a wedding, I celebrate the spiritual union but I imagine there are others there for different reasons. You never know what's in a man's heart. This is why we can't judge actions. Don't let events or objects fool you because of their "common" use or interpretation, you have to know what's in each heart to know the true meaning.

However God says: "And they two shall be one flesh." God puts emphasis on the physical union. That is what the definition of marriage is--for everyone. It doesn't matter what emphasis you put on it. You must go by the definition that God himself defined marriage to be--for all people: saved and unsaved alike.
The only thing it says about Isaak's marriage, for example, is:
"And he took her into his tent, and was comforted."
Where was the emphasis?

 

[Palatka51]

Marriage is a God ordained institution, not a Christian one.
Government is a God ordained institution, not a Christian one.
The government of Paul's day, Nero's government, one of the most wicked governments in history was ordained of God.

All of the Islamic governments of today are ordained of God. God put them in place. If we live in such a place, we are to submit to their ordinances, according to Romans 13. This is a New Testament command.

The marriage is a union between one man and one woman. It always was and always will be. "Jesus said concerning divorce "from the beginning it was not so." He said: "What God has joined together let no man put asunder." It is a union. But that union is performed by man, not God.
It can be performed by a justice of the peace.
It can be performed by a Muslim cleric.
It can be performed by a Sikh priest.

The union of one man and one woman was a command given to every man and woman on the earth, not just to Christians. Marriage is not an exclusive Christian institution. It is for all people. It was incorporated into the laws of our nation, and we aren't even a Christian nation. It is incorporated into the laws of other nations that are not even built on Christian principles. It is God's institution for all men and women, just as government is.

The fact that God will use some of the characteristics of a Godly marriage: its purity, sacrifice, etc. to compare it to Christ and the church, has no bearing on this subject. Marriage is for all people, not just for Christians. To say otherwise is ridiculous.

Hammer raised high........ BAM!!!! Nailed to the wall!!!

Great post.